United States v. Ambers, 26618 Summary Calendar.

Citation416 F.2d 942
Decision Date19 January 1970
Docket NumberNo. 26618 Summary Calendar.,26618 Summary Calendar.
PartiesUNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Willie J. AMBERS, Defendant-Appellant.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit

Charles S. Conley, Montgomery, Ala., for appellant.

Ira DeMent, U.S. Atty., Jack B. Patterson, Asst. U.S. Atty., Montgomery, Ala., Fred M. Vinson, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Beatrice Rosenberg, J. Thomas Carroll, Jr., Attorneys, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for appellee.

Before WISDOM, COLEMAN and SIMPSON, Circuit Judges.

Certiorari Denied January 19, 1970. See 90 S.Ct. 686.

PER CURIAM:

Pursuant to new Rule 18 of the Rules of this Court, we have concluded on the merits that this case is of such character as not to justify oral argument and have directed the Clerk to place the case on the Summary Calendar and to notify the parties in writing. See Murphy v. Houma Well Service, 5 Cir. 1969, 409 F.2d 804, Part I.

Appellant, Willie Ambers, was indicted on a single count for embezzling union funds in violation of Title 29, U.S.C. § 501(c). Upon return of a guilty verdict he was sentenced to eighteen months imprisonment. He appeals on the ground that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the verdict.

At the conclusion of the government's case appellant "moved to dismiss the indictment" on the ground that the government had failed to establish a prima facie case. The court denied the motion and appellant then introduced evidence in his own behalf. He did not renew his motion at the close of all of the evidence.

The record indicates that Ambers' attorney was attempting to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence by his motion to dismiss the indictment. The proper procedure was a motion for judgment of acquittal. Rule 29, F.R. Crim.P. We can, and do in this instance, disregard the mislabeling of appellant's motion.

It is more difficult, however, to disregard the fact that the motion was not renewed at the close of all of the evidence. This failure to renew the challenge operates to waive the benefit of the motion and precludes appellate review, unless a failure to review would result in a manifest miscarriage of justice. Meeks v. United States, 5 Cir. 1958, 259 F.2d 328.

We have reviewed the record in this case and cannot say that it is so devoid of evidence pointing to appellant's guilt that it would be a manifest miscarriage of justice not to set the verdict aside. Indeed, viewed in the light most...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • State v. Roberts
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • 2 Septiembre 2011
    ...the evidence, the proper motion should be for a judgment of acquittal.” Whorton, 225 Kan. at 254, 589 P.2d 610 (citing United States v. Ambers, 416 F.2d 942 [5th Cir.1969], cert. denied 396 U.S. 1039, 90 S.Ct. 686, 24 L.Ed.2d 683 [1970] ). Jeopardy The second aspect of the definition of a j......
  • U.S. v. Ayewoh, Criminal No. 07-00467 (GAG).
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Puerto Rico
    • 20 Noviembre 2008
    ...the indictment challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, the proper motion should be for judgment of acquittal. United States v. Ambers, 416 F.2d 942, 943 (5th Cir.1969); United States v. Salman, 378 F.3d 1266, 1268 (11th Cir.2004) ("A motion for acquittal under Rule 29 is the proper aven......
  • State v. Whorton, 49810
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • 20 Enero 1979
    ...to dismiss challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, the proper motion should be for a judgment of acquittal. See United States v. Ambers, 416 F.2d 942 (5th Cir. 1969), Cert. denied, 396 U.S. 1039, 90 S.Ct. 686, 24 L.Ed.2d 683 The state argues the trial court "dismissed" the information b......
  • United States v. Caceres-Prado, Cr. No. 84-379.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Puerto Rico
    • 28 Diciembre 1984
    ...evidence is more properly made by motion for judgment of acquittal, after the Government presents its evidence at trial. U.S. v. Ambers, 416 F.2d 942 (5th Cir.1969). Questions of fact, credibility of witnesses and weight of the evidence is for the jury to decide. U.S. v. Tane, 329 F.2d 848 ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT